Page:Life of William Shelburne (vol 2).djvu/254

222 faint, and the geographers who were consulted on the age of it, were divided in their opinion. The map has not got the rest of the boundary between the two countries indicated upon it. (See Mr. Hobhouse's letter to Mr. Addington, 18th May 1842, and the opinions of Mr. Arrowsmith, Mr. Wylde, and others, at the Record Office.) It may then be asked what was the district described by Strachey in his despatch of November the 8th, as won back by his efforts? Evidently the strip of land between the St. John and the St. Croix: for Oswald had originally proposed the former river as the eastern boundary (see his despatch to Townshend, 7th October 1782), while Strachey obtained the St. Croix. (See his despatch to Townshend, 8th November 1782.)

In the "Observations" of Mr. Featherstonhaugh on the Ashburton Treaty, much stress is laid on a map existing in the French Archives, and having on it a red line drawn in conformity with the English claim. Mr. Featherstonhaugh considered that this was undoubtedly the map mentioned by Franklin in a letter of December 2nd, 1782, and printed in his works, as that on which the treaty line had by him been drawn. The English Government of the day caused an inquiry to be set on foot in Paris on the subject, but the conclusion they arrived at was not in keeping with the views of Mr. Featherstonhaugh. "There is not on this map," says Sir Henry Bulwer, "any writing signifying why it was thus marked, nor do I know of any clue thereto, except the letter of Dr. Franklin, quoted by Mr. Featherstonhaugh, should be considered to furnish such. But I should remark that there is no reference, as would be usually made in such cases by the Record Keepers on Dr. Franklin's letters, referring to the map, and consequently there is no chain of evidence nor anything beyond conjecture or probability connecting the one with the other." (Sir Henry Bulwer to Lord Cowley, May 3rd, 1843, with the certificate of M. Barbié du Bocage, of the French "Archives.")

Had the merits of the case not been obscured by national jealousies, little or no difficulty need ever have arisen in determining the position of the North-west angle of Nova Scotia, as understood in 1782. A real difficulty, however, would have arisen from the projection of the map by Mitchell, which described the country in dispute, being entirely incorrect. While the English and American Commissioners in 1782 were under the impression that a line drawn due north from the source of the river St. Croix would touch the Highlands near the source of the Madawaska, it appeared, when the country was properly surveyed, that such a line would touch them between the headwaters of the Metis and the Restigouche. There would consequently have been a hopeless conflict between the map and the terms of the treaty.